"Breaking news"?? Obama's cabinet selection!
By thedogshrink
@thedogshrink (1266)
United States
November 13, 2008 9:22pm CST
Well, I just heard that Obama sent out a 63 page questionnaire to people who want to apply for a position in his cabinet!
The man who would answer no questions, provide no records, and who has entire chunks missing from what is known of his past is now making applicants answer 63 pages of questions about their beliefs, associations, work, facebook, schools, more!
One of the questions is "do you or anyone in your family, or anyone you know, own a gun?"
Now, WHY would that be a question for a cabinet member?
Another question is for the applicant to name any and all friends and associates that may be "questionable".
They are also expected to send copies of school and work records, their facebook page, other webpages/activity, and "any emails they have sent/received that might cause embarrassment to the President-elect".
What does everyone think of this?
IS he trying to week out anyone who might oppose him -- the gun question?
Or could he be trying to prove to the people he is NOT going to go left, and do so by showing everyone's affiliations?
I saw this on TV, but I'll get a link as soon as I find one.
3 people like this
6 responses
@Barb42 (4214)
• United States
15 Nov 08
I was shocked when I heard about this on radio this morning! One of the questions was "Do you have a diary, and if so, would you mind us reading it?" Pray tell me what MY personal diary has to do with Obama? If I had a diary, it wouldn't be about him. It would be my personal thoughts. I guess he thinks someone might have a hidden agenda and would be stupid enough to write it down. Someone called in and said they'd BURN a diary, if they had been applying for a position with his administration. Another one said there wouldn't be that many people applying!
1 person likes this
@thedogshrink (1266)
• United States
15 Nov 08
I can't believe these questions! Yeah, burning would be best, I guess, since most of us can't seal all our records the way Obama did his.
@Barb42 (4214)
• United States
16 Nov 08
Well, I don't trust the guy. From the moment I found out he would not release a real copy of his birth certificate, it sent up a red flag. Now he wants to know every facet of one's life that puts in a resume for a job with his administration. To quote a Bible scripture, I was 'bought with a price'; therefore, my life is not my own, so I wouldn't want to share any of it with Obama or his administration!
1 person likes this
@whiteheather39 (24403)
• United States
14 Nov 08
According the what I have read most people think this is a most invasive questionnaire. Other comments I have read many people suggested that if Obama himself was to complete it he would not be hired!
1 person likes this
@thedogshrink (1266)
• United States
14 Nov 08
I think that is more than a suggestion and more like a fact! He would not be hired based on real answers to such a questionnaire. He couldn't get a security clearance, if he weren't elected.
That means if another Democrat had been elected President, Obama could not be on the White House staff -- he couldn't get a security clearance with his close associations to known terrorists and anti American speakers.
I never knew that Presidents were just handed the most top security clearance -- I thought they were investigated. I think in this day and age, that Presidential candidates should be investigated to be sure they'd pass a security test and to be sure they are legitimate citizens, etc. It should be a matter of routine -- as I think many of us thought it was!
@whiteheather39 (24403)
• United States
15 Nov 08
I wonder what will happen when the "honeymoon stage" is over and reality sets in! I am have the impression that Obama had a much softer security background check up because every is afraid that if the results were less than favorable all the Obama supporter would be screaming that it was racially motivated.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
14 Nov 08
Yet I bet, when the cabinet is filled, not one of them would be able to get a security clearance if they had to go through the same background check a military private does.
1 person likes this
@Yestheypayme2dothis (7874)
• United States
14 Nov 08
I saw a short little job application for a job at the White House on his site that I thought was comical. Now this. I wonder if HE ever filled out anything like this before? We know so much about him that he denies. Can we deny, deny, deny, too? Any application like this is unreal. He is concerned about hiring someone who might cause him embarrassment when he has done that himself. I would not swear my life away to work for him.
1 person likes this
@mommyboo (13174)
• United States
16 Nov 08
I cannot believe someone would be interested enough to go work for him to answer 63 pages of questions which may be personal, incriminating, embarrassing, hurtful, etc etc. Especially after the whole hush job with HIM not answering or coming clean about things. When HE answers his 63 page questionnaire, in full, honestly, and posts it online in public where everybody can read it for themselves, then perhaps I'd feel a little more warm and fuzzy about it. The idea right now is repulsive.
I also think it's rather silly for everybody to be talking about facebook or myspace or other social sites. Social, not work related. There are so many things in one's personal life that has nothing to do with work and to be held accountable for your personal life when it makes no difference if people weren't going about digging for information is way below the belt. I do understand not wanting to hire someone with a criminal record but what if someone is checked off a list of applicants if an interviewer sees a video their friend posted of the applicant getting drunk 10 years ago? I'm not saying this WOULD happen, I'm saying allowing companies and recruiters to pore over and scrutinize things like this is opening the door toward something like this happening.
Either way, nobody is going to be entirely forthcoming about things like that, even if they claim to be. I bet everybody has an email somewhere where they said something lousy about somebody or entertained thoughts about it at least.
